Roberts v. State of Washington, 3:24-cv-05507

Charles Henry Roberts filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis under the All Writs Act, challenging his two 2015 Washington state felony harassment convictions.
Roberts claimed he was no longer in custody for these convictions but continued to suffer collateral consequences, making habeas corpus under § 2254 unavailable.
Roberts argued his felony harassment convictions violated the First Amendment.
He also sought to proceed in forma pauperis and requested the Court stay his federal petition while he exhausted state remedies through a personal restraint petition.
The State of Washington (respondent) opposed the stay, asserting the federal court lacked jurisdiction over a writ of error coram nobis aimed at a state conviction.
The magistrate judge recommended denying and dismissing the petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, with other pending motions denied as moot.

Issue	Roberts' Argument	State's Argument	Held
Federal jurisdiction for writ of error coram nobis	Federal court can vacate state conviction via writ	Writ available only in same court of conviction	No federal jurisdiction over state convictions
Stay and abey petition while exhausting remedies	Stay should issue to allow exhaustion in state court	No jurisdiction exists, so no grounds for a stay	Denied as moot (dismissal for lack of jurisdiction)
Proceeding in forma pauperis	Roberts should be allowed to proceed IFP	Not substantively addressed due to jurisdiction	Denied as moot

United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502 (writ of coram nobis is only available in court of conviction)
Madigan v. Wells, 224 F.2d 577 (writ can only issue in the convicting court)
Sinclair v. Louisiana, 679 F.2d 513 (federal writ not available to attack state conviction)
Franklin v. State of Or., State Welfare Div., 662 F.2d 1337 (court may dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction)